Camus: The Outsider

[renegade]

If I am understanding this book correctly it is about a man who was put to trial for the murder of a man. The facts were not much in question - he admitted to killing the man but it appears the motive may have been self defence. Essentially the man was convicted of the crime but not based on the facts of the case but rather an assessment of his character. He was found to be very much lacking in human emotion, primarily because he felt no grief over his mother's death or remorse over the killing.

What are the issues in the book? It seems that the man is considerred to be evil for lacking emotion. However is that fair. With the vast majority of bad stuff happening in the world as a result of negative emotions are we right to condem this man for being an outsider, if he has not commited a crime? Why is he so repugnant to us? Is it true that he is evil for his lack of emotion?

[Preno]

Dunno. To me, the book just seemed a celebration of extreme phlegmatism. I mean, basically the whole book goes like this: stuff happens to the guy and the guy keeps saying "so what?". He's not evil, it's just that his attitude is stupid.

[Dlx2]

It's more a literary observation that who we are is defined by sociiety and that we can't do a damned thing about it. Not really a moral discussion so muchh as it's an existential discussion.

[untermensche]

I don't think the motive was self-defense.

There was no motive. Or the motive was so obscure it can't be recognized.

I can't see any clear motivation for the murder. It was absurd.

[Dlx2]

It was absurd.

In existentialism, all actions are absurd. This is Camus being heavy-handed in his allegory.

[Unbeatable]

From what I remember, the sun made him do it. It was too hot or bright or something like that.